Paclitaxel injection concentrate for nanodispersion versus nab-paclitaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer: a multicenter, randomized, comparative phase II/III study.

Paclitaxel is widely used in the treatment of patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Formulations of paclitaxel contain surfactants and solvents or albumin derived from human blood. The use of co-solvents such as polyoxyethylated castor oil is thought to contribute to toxicity profile and hypersensitivity reactions as well as leaching of plasticizers from polyvinyl chloride bags and infusion sets. Currently, nab-paclitaxel, an albumin-bound paclitaxel in nanometer range continues to be the preferred taxane formulation used in clinic. This study (CTRI/2010/091/001116) investigated the efficacy and tolerability of a polyoxyethylated castor oil- and albumin-free formulation of paclitaxel [paclitaxel injection concentrate for nanodispersion (PICN)] compared with nab-paclitaxel in women with refractory MBC. The current study was a multicenter, open-label, parallel-group, randomized, comparative phase II/III trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of PICN (260 mg/m(2) [n = 64] and 295 mg/m(2) [n = 58] every 3 weeks) compared with nab-paclitaxel (260 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks [n = 58]) in women 18 and 70 years old with confirmed MBC. Overall response rate (ORR) was assessed with imaging every 2 cycles. An independent analysis of radiologic data was performed for evaluable patients. Progression-free survival (PFS) was a secondary efficacy measure. Independent radiologist-assessed ORRs in the evaluable population of women aged ≥70 years were 35, 49, and 43 % in the PICN 260 mg/m(2), PICN 295 mg/m(2), and nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) arms, respectively. Median PFS in the evaluable population was 23, 35, and 34 weeks in the PICN 260 mg/m(2), PICN 295 mg/m(2), and nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) arms, respectively. Adverse events occurred in similar proportions of patients across treatment arms. Hypersensitivity reactions were not frequently observed with the clinical use of PICN across the treatment cohorts. In women with metastatic breast cancer, PICN at 260 and 295 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks was effective and well tolerated and showed similar tolerability compared with nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. Statistically, significant differences were not observed in the PICN and nab-paclitaxel treatment arms for radiologist-assessed ORR or median PFS. The novel paclitaxel formulation, PICN, offers apart from efficacy, potential safety advantage of decreased use of corticosteroid pretreatment and the absence of the risk of transmission of blood product-borne disease.

A multicenter phase II randomized study of Cremophor-free polymeric nanoparticle formulation of paclitaxel in women with locally advanced and/or metastatic breast cancer after failure of anthracycline.

AIMS: Paclitaxel is extensively used in the treatment of advanced carcinomas of the breast, ovary and non-small cell lung cancer. In clinical use it is formulated in the non-ionic surfactant polyethoxylated castor oil (Cremophor) and dehydrated alcohol to enhance drug solubility. Cremophor adds to toxic effects of paclitaxel by producing or contributing to the well-described hypersensitivity reactions that commonly occur during its infusion, affecting a large number of patients. This randomized trial was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of novel nanoparticle-based paclitaxel in the treatment of patients with advanced breast cancer. METHOD: Patients were randomized to receive either nanoparticle paclitaxel (NP) 300 mg/m(2) , (NP300) or NP220 mg/m(2) or Cremophor paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) (CP 175). NP was administered as a 1-h infusion without premedication and CP as a 3-h infusion with premedication every 3 weeks. RESULTS: In total, 194 patients who had been administered at least one dose were included for safety analysis and 170 patients who completed at least two cycles of therapy were analyzed for efficacy. NP showed an overall response rate (complete response + partial response) of 40% in the NP220 and NP300 arms as compared to 31% in the CP arm. The incidence of neutropenia (all grades) was lowest in the NP220 arm (39.4%) compared to the NP300 (55%) and CP arm (50%). CONCLUSION: NP is well tolerated and can be safely administered without any premedication in comparison to conventional paclitaxel, which requires the use of premedication before administration. NP demonstrates promising efficacy with a favorable safety profile.

Trastuzumab plus anastrozole versus anastrozole alone for the treatment of postmenopausal women with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer: results from the randomized phase III TAnDEM study.

PURPOSE: TAnDEM is the first randomized phase III study to combine a hormonal agent and trastuzumab without chemotherapy as treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/hormone receptor-copositive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Postmenopausal women with HER2/hormone receptor-copositive MBC were randomly assigned to anastrozole (1 mg/d orally) with or without trastuzumab (4 mg/kg intravenous infusion on day 1, then 2 mg/kg every week) until progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat population. Results Overall, 103 patients received trastuzumab plus anastrozole; 104 received anastrozole alone. Patients in the trastuzumab plus anastrozole arm experienced significant improvements in PFS compared with patients receiving anastrozole alone (hazard ratio = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.84; median PFS, 4.8 v 2.4 months; log-rank P = .0016). In patients with centrally confirmed hormone receptor positivity (n = 150), median PFS was 5.6 and 3.8 months in the trastuzumab plus anastrozole and anastrozole alone arms, respectively (log-rank P = .006). Overall survival in the overall and centrally confirmed hormone receptor-positive populations showed no statistically significant treatment difference; however, 70% of patients in the anastrozole alone arm crossed over to receive trastuzumab after progression on anastrozole alone. Incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse events was 23% and 5%, respectively, in the trastuzumab plus anastrozole arm, and 15% and 1%, respectively, in the anastrozole alone arm; one patient in the combination arm experienced New York Heart Association class II congestive heart failure. CONCLUSION: Trastuzumab plus anastrozole improves outcomes for patients with HER2/hormone receptor-copositive MBC compared with anastrozole alone, although adverse events and serious adverse events were more frequent with the combination.

Influence of postoperative complications on relapse-free survival in gastrointestinal malignancies.

OBJECTIVE: A variety of preoperative variables-such as perforation prior to surgery, poor nutritional status, and comorbid conditions such as diabetes-are already known to shorten relapse-free survival in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. However, the significance of postoperative events in gastrointestinal malignancies is still debated and has not been studied in the population of southern India. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted at Kidwai Memorial Institute of Oncology, Bangalore, India, from September 2004 to 2006. Patients from a single surgical unit who had undergone surgery with curative intent for gastrointestinal malignancies were evaluated (to maintain uniformity, patients who had undergone palliative surgery were not included in the analysis). We assumed anastomotic leak, delayed wound healing, and postoperative weight loss > 10% as risk factors predictive of poor disease-free survival. These factors were evaluated in all patients, and risk for development of relapse was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 236 patients were evaluated. Baseline parameters were similar in both groups. Compared with patients who developed no postoperative complications, we found that the risk of relapse is 9.8 times greater in patients having anastomotic leak, 8.2 times greater in those with delayed recovery, and 2.3 times greater in those having excessive weight loss. The risk was uniform in all types of gastrointestinal malignancies. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that anastomotic leak, delayed wound healing, and postoperative weight loss in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies confer poor disease-free survival. The presence of these complications warrants closer follow-up and management as appropriate.

Retroperitoneal inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMT) is a neoplasm of unknown etiology occurring at various sites. By definition, it is composed of spindle cells (myofibroblasts) with variable inflammatory component, hence the name is IMT. CASE PRESENTATION: The present case is of a 46 years old woman presented with a history of flank pain, abdominal mass and intermittent hematuria for last 6 months. The initial diagnosis was kept as renal cell carcinoma. Finally, it turned out to be a case of retroperitoneal IMT. The patient was managed by complete surgical resection of the tumor. CONCLUSION: IMT is a rare neoplasm of uncertain biological potential. Complete surgical resection remains the mainstay of the treatment.

Phase III study of letrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women: analysis of survival and update of efficacy from the International Letrozole Breast Cancer Group.

PURPOSE: To analyze overall survival (OS) and update efficacy data for letrozole versus tamoxifen as first-line therapy in postmenopausal women with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multicenter phase III trial randomly assigned 916 patients with hormone receptor-positive or unknown tumors letrozole 2.5 mg (n = 458) or tamoxifen 20 mg (n = 458) daily until disease progression. Optional cross-over was permitted at the treating physician's discretion. This report updates efficacy at a median follow-up of 32 months. RESULTS: The superiority of letrozole to tamoxifen was confirmed for time to progression (median, 9.4 v 6.0 months, respectively; P <.0001), time to treatment failure (median, 9 v 5.7 months, respectively; P <.0001), overall objective response rate (32% v 21%, respectively; P =.0002), and overall clinical benefit. Median OS was slightly prolonged for the randomized letrozole arm (34 v 30 months, respectively). Although this difference in OS is not significant, survival was improved in the randomized letrozole arm over the first 2 years of the study. Approximately one half of the patients in each arm crossed over. Total duration of endocrine therapy ("time to chemotherapy") was significantly longer (P =.005) for patients initially on letrozole (median, 16 months) than for patients initially on tamoxifen (median, 9 months). Time to worsening of Karnofsky performance score was significantly delayed with letrozole compared with tamoxifen (P =.001). CONCLUSION: This study documents the superiority of letrozole over tamoxifen in first-line endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with advanced breast cancer.